While I am not crazy about skeleton watches per se, I have had a Tissot and it was a superb watch, elegant, and classic in appearance and utterly reliable. I never had any issues or any trouble with it.
Long may you enjoy your Tissot.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Who's got a nice watch? Traditional watches only, no smartwatches please.
- Thread starter JW8725
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
While I am not crazy about skeleton watches per se, I have had a Tissot and it was a superb watch, elegant, and classic in appearance and utterly reliable. I never had any issues or any trouble with it.
Long may you enjoy your Tissot.
At what? Value for cost? Plenty of other watches are better.
Accuracy? Others are better, including a cheap Quartz watch?
Toughness? Gshock will probably beat it.
Best looking? Now we get to the point, it's about taste and what speaks to someone. And quite honestly, you can get the EXACT same look from less expensive brands as well.
Best status symbol? Probably, since it is one of the most recognizable luxury watches. Which leads to the first thing out of most people's mouths, " is it real".
To each his own.
An opinion, strongly held, or otherwise, or, something that you are prepared to support with reasons?
Personally, I like the old, understated, classic look, - some of the Rolexes from the 1950s strike me as beautiful - but I am not all that keen on some of the more modern Rolexes - they lack subtlety, and are too 'massively' bling, bling for my taste. Then, again, each to their own...
Well argued post; broadly speaking, I'm in agreement with you.
I am not sure the guy you replied to is even a person. I think it is some kind of bot. Look at all his post in this forum. They are simple, weird or out of place replies only in the picture gallery section.
Believe it or not I've had this one for many years. It was a gift to myself out of money made designing websites for local businesses back when I was in high school. I've looked after it well, but over the years the bracelet and bezel have both been replaced to keep it looking fresh.
Who's got a nice watch?
I'd have a Rolex if I could morally afford one because I've admired them since I was a child. I like the Submariner and Sea Dweller because they are subtle and not flash, but the classic diver design. I am around a lot of people wearing Rolex's and truth be told it is only usually watch enthusiasts that even notice. People don't get close enough to see that it is a Rolex and are only usually impressed when told so. I prefer subtlety like that. I hate it when people suggest others buy a Rolex because it's a status symbol. That is too simplistic for me and completely disregards the owners interest level and knowledge IMO.
Are they the best? Well it depends what the parameters of best mean? They will never be as accurate as a quartz or as tough as a g shock for obvious reasons. I think people who like these types of Rolex appreciate the craftsmanship and history of the brand, not necessarily a piece that is going to get them to that meeting in time. Watch preferences are so subjective it is very much like mobile phones, there is no right or wrong answer. There are also so many great watches in existence and there are pieces that are a fraction of the cost that give me immense enjoyment.
I'd have a Rolex if I could morally afford one because I've admired them since I was a child. I like the Submariner and Sea Dweller because they are subtle and not flash, but the classic diver design. I am around a lot of people wearing Rolex's and truth be told it is only usually watch enthusiasts that even notice. People don't get close enough to see that it is a Rolex and are only usually impressed when told so. I prefer subtlety like that. I hate it when people suggest others buy a Rolex because it's a status symbol. That is too simplistic for me and completely disregards the owners interest level and knowledge IMO.
Are they the best? Well it depends what the parameters of best mean? They will never be as accurate as a quartz or as tough as a g shock for obvious reasons. I think people who like these types of Rolex appreciate the craftsmanship and history of the brand, not necessarily a piece that is going to get them to that meeting in time. Watch preferences are so subjective it is very much like mobile phones, there is no right or wrong answer. There are also so many great watches in existence and there are pieces that are a fraction of the cost that give me immense enjoyment.
You know, I think that - (having taken your suggestion and quickly glanced through all five - somewhat uninspiring - posts which come under that name) you may well be right.
That is a great story; quality watches which were carefully planned gifts to oneself (or to, or from, significant others) are very special and tend to be cherished and well looked after. Anyway, long may you wear it and continue to derive enjoyment from it.
Besides, it is a very nice feeling to be able to wear (having bought) something special that comes legitimately from the fruits of your own labours or endeavours. Well wear.
Exactly. Each to their own.
I am perfectly happy with my Omega Deville, but were I ever to buy a Rolex, or anything similar, it would be one of the understated elegant classic timepieces from the 1950s.
I don't think status is the only reason people buy Rolex watches. Watch enthusiasts may buy them for the history, the look or any other number of reasons.
Im lucky to work with another "watch guy". His preference is to Rado and some fashion style Quartz watches. We still enjoy showing each other our watches and talking about them even though our tastes are different. Two others wear Rolex subs, but have no real interests in watches.
Added the Moto 360 to my collection of watches.
Rado vs Emporio Armani vs Moto 360 vs Pebble Steel
It really is a nice watch.
Rado vs Moto 360
Rado vs Emporio Armani vs Moto 360 vs Pebble SteelIt really is a nice watch.
Rado vs Moto 360
Every word is true.
(In certain circles a Rolex is still a status symbol. Nothing more, nothing less.)
Well I hope the two people you know with Rolex Subs have not created a stereotype for you where you just assume people buy them just for the name Rolex on the face. Unfortunately there are people out there in the public eye who flaunt luxury brands and these mean negative associations are built. Thankfully I think Rolex has escaped that.
----------
I know but as long as people understand it is not reflective of the whole brand itself. It's a bit like when people suggest an iPhone is a status symbol. Of course it is in certain circles but for the vast majority of people who own one (myself included) it's simply a common everyday mobile phone. This is why I enjoy talking to fellow watch enthusiasts about these types of topics because it's a shared hobby and stereotypes don't come into it.
Loving watches is about something very different than being addicted to status symbols.
Although there are a lot of clichés even in the circle of watch enthusiasts. I don't share most of them.
Some say that a watch is the only jewelry of a man. Nevertheless it should be practical, precize etc.
Although there are a lot of clichés even in the circle of watch enthusiasts. I don't share most of them.
Some say that a watch is the only jewelry of a man. Nevertheless it should be practical, precize etc.
Who's got a nice watch?
Besides which, everyone knows that Patek is the best
*runs for cover*
Although seriously, most non watch geeks see Rolex as the best without even having a clue what a VC, AP or Patek etc. is because they don't have an extensive knowledge of watch history/ the market. The same as the general populace who would say that Ferrari is the best.
Besides which, everyone knows that Patek is the best
*runs for cover*
Although seriously, most non watch geeks see Rolex as the best without even having a clue what a VC, AP or Patek etc. is because they don't have an extensive knowledge of watch history/ the market. The same as the general populace who would say that Ferrari is the best.
Last edited:
Alas, my camera runs on film, and my mobile is a Nokia 3510 ..and I have never mastered the art of digital photography .
I bought the Tissot back in 2003, (I had a Skagen - a rather nice Danish watch prior to that), and subsequently, five or so years ago, bought the Omega Deville I currently have.
The Tissot has Arabic numbers, a cream face, sweep seconds and a date function, and blued-steel hands ..
I think there was a misunderstanding. I do not think Rolex is a status symbol. Others do, which is why you see some people who know nothing about watches buy one when they "make it". People who have some knowledge of watches see the history, the workmanship, etc. Watch enthusiasts, like some of us, are the exception when it comes to knowledge about various brands and what interests us in certain watches.
Lovely watch; I had a Skagen with a dark blue face over a decade ago, and gave it to my brother; he still wears it. A solid, well made, sturdy and sharp looking watch, it never gave me any trouble.
The best is whatever you personally like and prefer. I prefer my Submariner. The next guy may prefer his Speedmaster, so for him, Omega would be best. It's all a matter of taste.
I agree that its never wrong to like a specific watch... Just like it's not wrong to prefer an old Ford Bronco to a new Mercedes; however, one can make a good argument for which performs better or is more luxurious (based on engineering, materials, testing, assembly etc.).
Again, there is no wrong choice, because watches mean different things to different people. But I think saying "it's all a matter of taste" is oversimplifying it a bit.